It’s always puzzled me. A couple of Christians begin talking about starting a new church, say, in a new housing development or community. They decide to gather in their living room each week to test the waters and they soon discover the joyful simplicity of “ekklesia” as experienced in those early years of Christianity. They spend lots of time together: picnics at the park, sporting events, birthdays, anniversaries, meals, caring for one another in times of grief and struggle, and sharing their faith in real, tangible ways.
Time moves on. A number of new families join this attractive, loving, caring community of faith, including some who are tentatively exploring what it means to be a Christian and others who are just beginning their walk with Jesus. Things begin getting a bit crowded in the living room and so, fearful of breaking up the wonderful fellowship, a couple of the more experienced believers (perhaps even a young church planter) suggests that they find a bigger place to meet: a school, community center, movie theater, or even a retail storefront. It sounds so practical and it really would take the strain off those who have to make sure their home is presentable every Sunday.
As the group continues to grow, everyone is so happy about this new location that no one notices the near-immediate loss of intimacy that once attracted them at the beginning. Their exciting young minister is casting grand visions for the future and they get swept along with the euphoria associated with mega-church madness. A few years later, they have committed themselves to a massive debt, well into the millions, for a fifty-acre site on prime real estate and a multi-stage building plan that will keep them strapped to this high-flying, church growth rocket.
Buildings, budgets, and lots of programs to keep the momentum going and the money flowing to service the debt. And no thinks to ask, “Why?” The memories quickly fade of those precious early years. People are now so busy attending meetings, volunteering to staff the various programs, and serving the “edifice” that no one has time to think about whether things could be different or ought to be different. But they have a facility that’s the envy of every evangelical congregation for miles. Isn’t that what it’s all about? Starting small is great and even necessary in the beginning, but the time comes when a group has to become a “real” church, right?
Sadly, this sort of church planting scenario is played out every day, all over the world (except perhaps in China, Cuba, and North Korea). God’s people get so caught up with a physical place to worship that many will never notice it when the Lord removes His presence from their meetings. In response to a woman who tried to engage him on the subject of the most appropriate place to worship, Jesus said,
The hour is coming, and is now here, when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth, for the Father is seeking such people to worship him. God is spirit, and those who worship him must worship in spirit and truth. ((John 4:23-24, ESV))
Now I’m not necessarily advocating the exclusive use of private dwellings for our worship, fellowship, discipleship, ministry and evangelism. My question runs deeper than that: does the Bible require us to have formal meetings—as we are currently accustomed to doing—at all? Houses don’t necessarily insure the presence of the Holy Spirit any more than a 25,000-seat “worship center” (I really detest this phrase), so it’s not the physical structure I’m thinking about.
Help me understand what Jesus meant by worshiping “in spirit and in truth.” It seems to me that we are taking a huge step backward when we advocate the necessity of buildings to worship God each week. Even Peter declared that we, as individual believers, “like living stones, are being built into a spiritual house to be a holy priesthood, offering spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ” ((1 Peter 2:5, ESV)). I would value your comments!
Comments 9
Bill, good stuff. I submit that worshiping “in spirit and truth” means so much more than a mere “once a week” or “two to three times per week” official gathering of the saints for formal worship. I think that is what you are getting at. Worshiping in spirit and truth is a 24/7 thing. As far as “where” it is to occur… anywhere you find yourself at any time day or night. Obviously we are not to forsake the assembling of ourselves together to hear the public reading of scripture and the teaching of sound doctrine. But, these meetings are to be more than a simple monologue presentation of scripture and doctrine. It seems, according to I Cor 14, that it involves more than one person speaking. It seems to involve the asking and answering of questions even. And is meant to bring “edification” to the body. Heck, Col 3 says that we are to “speak to one another!” I think worshiping in the spirit and in truth means that we are to realize that we are a spiritual gathering as much as we are a physical gathering. In other words, we are the “spiritual house of God” gathered together physically so that we might strengthen the “spiritual house” and offer the sacrifice of praise and good works. Certainly we are not gathering in order to “impress” God with our gathering and fervent worship. We come together to praise God, fast, pray, listen to His word and to encourage one another. This ought to be pretty informal I think. Hard to encourage one another when we are to sit, hushedly following the prescribed “order of worship”, keeping the children on a short leash, dressed in our most sterling attire, all the while appearing keenly interested and impacted by the speaker. Who knows, perhaps during the hour long presentation we may even take a note or two. It is pretty easy to guess what it DOESN’T look like. But, what DOES it look like? Probably something like it did for Jesus in His public ministry. Maybe it looks like Paul’s informal gatherings in upper rooms or aboard ships. Maybe it looks like the synagogue gatherings. Heck, even in synagogue they sent word to Paul and asked him if he and his companions had a word from God for them…
Can you imagine a pastor giving up his pulpit today in such an impromptu manner?
I think this is why you find so many plain ole “meeting houses” in and around Wales… don’t you think Bill? The Puritans did not want more formalism. Whether meeting in a building, in a home or in the open air, I think it is the goal of every church to avoid dry formalism, but, how easily we slide into it!
Posted 16 May 2007 at 11:37 am ¶Hey, Tom. Thanks for dropping in and sharing a word! There’s one statement I would raise a question about, where you said,
Go back and look at what Hebrews 10:24-24 really says. There’s nothing in those verses about gathering to hear Scripture or teaching: just an exhortation to get together with other believers for the purpose of encouraging one another and stirring one another to love and good deeds. See, we’ve been sold a bill of goods that Hebrews 10:25 means to show up at a particular address every week, file into nice, neat rows like good little church members, listen to the preacher, put some money in the plate, and don’t ask too many questions about why we do what we do.
What do you think?
Posted 16 May 2007 at 1:15 pm ¶Buildings are a necessity, whether they are thatched roof huts or monstrous buildings that take up city blocks…aren’t they? Maybe it’s due to our desire to be comfortable. But I see what you mean (I think) about the desensitizing or loss of intimacy that occurs when the church grows and desires a bigger building. (I can’t comment on what it is like to desire a building-period, as I have never attended a ‘church plant’.) It’s sad. I attended a church that was giddy over its ‘growth’ and we all enjoyed the new carpet, comfy chairs, and the bigger sanctuary (yea, it was called a worship center). But something died when we left the smaller building (and not surprisingly, we never filled the worship center to capacity as was the plan…). I can’t express it very well, but something just changed . I’m not saying it’s always like that or that needing a bigger building is inherently bad, I can only speak for what I have experienced.
I agree, Hebrews 10 paints a picture of fellowship. But the early church did have public teaching, right? But that was teaching, not worshiping, right? Is there a distinction to be made between the two? But maybe I’m off track here…
Worshiping in spirit and in truth? I don’t think it’s the time-constrained services where the announcements have to be over by 10:55 so the sermon can be finished by 11:45 on the dot (for the lunch crowd). It also isn’t the first half hour of the service where the building committee chairman comes up and tells us “Where we are in our giving”. Nor do I think it is the ‘mystery’, pageantry, or formalism of some churches where prayers are recited, bits and pieces of the Bible are read as per a calendar, and tradition abounds.
Worship is believers in Christ, one on one with the Lord. It’s fellowship where we laugh and cry together. It’s sharing God’s Word with each other, building each other up. Sometimes it’s disciplining each other or counseling each other. It’s being always mindful of the grace that has been extended to us by God and, in turn, extending grace to our brethren. And this ‘living worship’ as I call it, can happen in your car, my dining room table, your living room, the field you help your neighbor plow, or under the car your helping your buddy fix. It’s living what we believe to be true: That we love and serve a wonderfully gracious God and we want others to share in what we have.
Worship is practicing the presence of Christ in our lives. If God is glorified in a church setting, no matter what size, then it is wonderful. But I’ll go out on a limb here and say that I think it’s becomingly increasingly rare. It’s the scripted, ultra-planned, bent-on-growing-the-church, concert type of ‘worship’ that leaves so many wondering what it truly means to worship.
If the focus is on buildings then worship will continue to get pushed into the periphery. But if our focus is on living worship of our Lord Jesus Christ, then God will not only be glorified, he might actually provide a building…:)
Posted 16 May 2007 at 3:52 pm ¶Bill, thanks for pointing that out. I agree that this verse is often used to enforce a mandatory attendance and compulsory giving. Nevertheless, the reference in Heb unmistakably enjoins us to assemble ourselves together. It doesn’t mention how often this might be done. Heck, the earliest believers met daily, breaking bread and devoting themselves to the apostles teaching. So, I guess teaching ought to be part of it don’t you think?
Also, what’s the point of having the gift of teaching, if teaching is not to occur in our gatherings. One last thing, while Hebrews doesn’t explicitly mention the reading of scripture, Paul commanded Timothy to give himself to the public reading of scripture and the teaching of sound doctrine:
13 Until I come, devote yourself to the public reading of Scripture, to exhortation, to teaching. 14 Do not neglect the gift you have, which was given you by prophecy when the council of elders laid their hands on you. 15 Practice these things, immerse yourself in them, so that all may see your progress. 16 Keep a close watch on yourself and on the teaching. Persist in this, for by so doing you will save both yourself and your hearers.
There are a multitude of passages that encourage the teaching and speaking gifts. If we are not to use them when we gather, then when ought we to use them? Only in one on one scenarios? It would seem that when the church gathers together, that that would afford a perfect opportunity for teaching. Certainly it doesn’t have to be done behind an elevated pulpit that is removes teh “clergy” from the “laity”. What do you think?
Posted 16 May 2007 at 8:02 pm ¶Some of my favorite times in church have been the informal evening services or those Wednesday night services when the pastor steps down from the pulpit and interacts with the congregation while teaching. We share testimonies, prayer requests, and praises. That to me is ‘real church’.
Also, our church here in WA does small groups in people’s homes. These groups are actually fairly structured in that the reading/studying of the Word is required…and the food ain’t bad either! But the setting is intimate and God is honored.
I think there has to be a conscious effort to remain a ‘church body’ and not become an organization in the commercial/committee sense of the word. And if the church is growing quickly, it can be hard to do. More people will naturally require more organization. Then the building needs to be enlarged, then comes the budget committee, then the children’s programs, then…like you said, mega church madness.
What did the early church do when it was busting at the seams? Did they gather in huge numbers like we see in the monster churches today? I know when the apostles preached many were added to their number, but did they continue to meet in such large numbers or did they break off into smaller groups? Committees, so to speak, were formed to help with the care of the widows and other needs of the church so that the apostles could devote themselves to teaching, how did they keep the intimacy/fellowship as the church grew? Was it an issue? Or did the apostles assume/know that the people would fracture off (not in a bad way) into smaller groups for fellowship and teaching? I’m curious.
Posted 16 May 2007 at 9:26 pm ¶Lynn & Tom, thanks for thinking out loud with me! Some may find it difficult or uncomfortable to do this, but I think it’s very helpful to work through issues like these together as brothers and sisters in Christ.
Are Buildings Necessary?
I’m not sure that I could agree with you, Lynn, that “buildings are a necessity.” In most settings that I have witnessed, perhaps 99.99% of the church buildings that we build, most are used only a couple of hours a week. It’s a huge waste of resources: cavernous “worship centers” with parking lots (especially in America), to be used for a miniscule 4–6 hours out of a 168-hour week. That’s really poor stewardship, isn’t it? Even here in Britain, we have these large, ornate chapels and churches built to last for a thousand years or more, and only a handful of people gather in them each Sunday for two or three hours at best. From my perspective, buildings may be a tool (if fully utilized in Christian ministries like feeding the hungry, teaching/caring for children, etc), but I wouldn’t say that they are a necessity for the ekklesia or gathering of God’s people. Our Chinese brothers and sisters simply do not have such luxuries and yet their spiritual growth puts the West to shame.
Rather than responding to your other questions in this comment section, I’m going to post two additional articles: “What about teaching?” and “How did the early church handle its rapid growth?” I hope you don’t mind.
Posted 17 May 2007 at 5:41 am ¶About buildings being a necessity, I guess I was thinking about when it rains…:) I haven’t thought about it the way you put it. It does seem wasteful to have such large buildings/complexes that aren’t being used. However, my mega church back home (yes, I’m somewhat uncomfortable with my church’s emphasis on numbers) uses their facilities throughout the week. Mind you, not the sanctuary, but the classrooms and gymnasium are used throughout the week for a home school co-op, Bible studies, and the seniors in our area. They do what you mentioned, use the building as a tool.
I am woefully ignorant when it comes to the the worship conditions of our Chinese brethren. I have always imagined it was like I commented above, worshiping God is the focus. Thinking about buildings might seem silly to them…they have to contend with simply seeking a safe place to worship. But if they could have a nice safe building, no matter how modest, to call their own, wouldn’t that be a blessing? But what I view as a blessing, they might view as an extravagance that isn’t necessary for the vitality of their worship. My lens is a purely western one. Sometimes I’m more a product of my environment than a reflection of my God.
Now, I am not an anti-Western person, I’m tired of that whole mentality of bashing my country, but you are right when you mention that their spiritual growth puts us to shame. We have the idols of excess and comfort to overcome, among a myriad of others. I’m afraid we have taken our blessings for granted in this country. And we have completely forgotten our God. Truly, this is becoming a godless nation. Some can take me to task for that, but the evidence is irrefutable. Anyway, when it comes to buildings, it’s all about comfort and prestige in some cases. The church I mentioned in my first comment, the one that grew and got a bigger facility…it was embarrassing. We had guest speakers from our denomination coming just to preach in our new complex. The sermons usually started out something like this: “It is such a blessing to be here. God has richly blessed you with this wonderful new building…” Truly, it got uncomfortable. (Think Bellvue Baptist Church in Memphis, TN, I’m sure you can Google it…our ‘remodel’ was fashioned after that.)
Are those types of buildings necessary? Absolutely not. They are a distraction, in my opinion.
But, how did God feel about Solomon’s temple? Was he pleased? Was it excessive? Did people meet inside it enough? I always thought it was built so ornately so as to glorify God (and God was the master architect, right?) Is that the case with these mega churches? I wonder…
Please do post those additional articles. I value your opinion.
Posted 17 May 2007 at 9:18 am ¶As I got up from posting my comment my son came up to me and said, “Mom, I need a new Bible case.” I just stood there and looked at him.
I said, “You don’t NEED a new Bible case. You want one. You NEED a Bible, and you have one.”
Maybe I’m reaching here, but is this exactly what we have been discussing?
Posted 17 May 2007 at 9:26 am ¶Absolutely! Great lesson from the Lord to you and to us! Thanks.
Posted 17 May 2007 at 10:43 am ¶Trackbacks & Pingbacks 1
[...] About Me « Edifice Complex: An Unhealthy Obsession May 17 2007 [...]
Post a Comment